AIR FORCE DISCHA RGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING  RECORD
NAME OF SERVIO; MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)	GRADE	AFSN/SSAN

:·------------------------ :
'	'

.--- - --- ----- ----.
AMN	'	'

'	'	'L......	'I

TYPE GEN

I	PERSONAL     APPEARANCE	x	I	RECORD    REVIEW

-v  !,;mwe	NAME OF COUNSEi. AND OR ORGANIZATION YES	No
x

ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COlJNS;

···.  ·-·-

MEMBER SITTING

HON

GEN	UOTHC	OTHER

DENY

'

....... - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -:----  ---------------t-------j-----t-----r--------j	1

'

'	x
'

'

-:'
''	x
-:'
'	x

x

-:'
'' '

x

'

'

'
'
--········-·----	- --..---  - ----------------t,,,,.,..-	- --,,-,===k-=-,,,....,.-..,-""=-::-c-:=-=-'°- -==·I
ISSUES	A94.05	INDEX   NlJMBER	A67.90	·····.·•·· .. .. . . < <<•    EXlllil.\iIMJ,;!:lti"!::tTOTHE B()	·.	.:)/./
1	ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2	APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3	LETTER OF NOTIFICATION
4	BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD
ADDITIONA L EXHIJ31TS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE
TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE flE

HEARING DATE

CASE NUMBER

25 Jul 2007	FD-2007-00011
»u	i!Pliiiiffi'I.S \ Ntii: Ij'N,ij!iKA'fi5¥\1111£!ffiSi .i-SSEiD1i
Case heard in Washington, D,C.

...'...id ...i...!..ffHEoimiiifl5RcJfii'i'm.........    ........... ··........j

V'ilBXiUi..i...l. il!ffi.!..N...Ai Rl'ArrriOONNAA!L.iEi"' ,j >< :·:· ·->-==.•..•-- - .-: /•: T• Ti.•?-->77"1

Advise applicant of the decision of the Board, the right to a personal appearance with/without counsel, and the right to submit an application to the AFBCM R,

Names and votes will be made available to the applicant at the applicant's request.

,-- - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -"" - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -----------/
''	':

c;.Jii8il•::jjir·- --- - - -	- -	"fr&i>oftsEMENT	- - - •"·P· ,,--- -	- - - - ""Ttjt•tt 7'S"o""/"2""!"J'"o""''f·""'...-----,..,,,,,,	i
TO,	FROMo

SAF/MRl:lR
550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40 RANDOLPH AFB, TX 78150-4742

SECRETARY OF TllE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL
AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW  BOARD 1535 COMMAND DR, EE WING, 3RD FLOOR ANDREWS AFB, MD 20762-7002

AFHQ  FORM  0-2077, JAN  00	(EF-Y2)	Previous edition will be used

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2007-00011	

GENERAL:  The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge to honorable.

The applicant was offered a personal appearance before the Discharge Review Board (DRB) but declined to exercise this right.

The attached brief contains available pertinent data on the applicant and the factors leading to the discharge.

FINDINGS:  Upgrade of discharge is denied.

The Board finds that neither the evidence of record nor that provided by the applicant substantiates an inequity or impropriety that would justify a change of discharge.

ISSUE:

Issue 1. Applicant contends discharge was inequitable because it was too harsh.  The records indicated the applicant received two Article  l 5s, a Vacation, seven Letters of Reprimand, two Letters of Counseling, a Record of Individual Counseling and a Memorandum for Record for misconduct.  His first Article 15 was for failure to go.  He was reduced in grade to Airman First Class, a suspended forfeiture of pay and a reprimand.  The Vacation action for failure to go resulted in a forfeiture of pay.  His last Article 15 was for
making false official statements.  He was punished with a reduction in grade to Airman, suspended forfeiture of pay, and a reprimand.  The applicant had further misconduct and was disciplined for failure to obey a lawful order, failure to report on time, driving under the influence of alcohol, suspended driving privileges, dereliction of duty, being late for duty, and showing up for duty unshaven.  The DRB opined that through these administrative actions, the applicant had ample opportunities to change his negative behavior.  The Board concluded the applicant's misconduct was a significant departure from conduct expected of all
military members.  The characterization of the discharge received by the applicant was found to be appropriate.

Issue 2.  The applicant cited his desire to receive the G.I. Bill benefits as justification for upgrade.  The DRB noted that when the applicant applied for these benefits, he signed a statement that he understood he must receive an Honorable discharge to receive future educational entitlements.  The Board was sympathetic to the impact the loss of these benefits was having on the applicant, but this is not a matter of inequity or impropriety which would warrant an upgrade.

CONCLUSIONS:  The Discharge Review Board concludes that the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation and was within the discretion of the discharge authority and that the applicant was provided full administrative due process.	
In view of the foregoing findings, the Board further concludes that there exists no legal or equitabl e basis for upgrade of discharge, thus the applicant's discharge should not be changed.

Attachment: Examiner's Brief